Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Two Questions about Time management and matches on 1 or 2 computers

Author: blass uri

Date: 23:26:34 08/29/99

Go up one level in this thread


On August 29, 1999 at 21:20:43, Robert Hyatt wrote:

>On August 29, 1999 at 18:17:13, Mogens Larsen wrote:
>
>>On August 29, 1999 at 15:22:41, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>>
>>>Ed doesn't either.  And I wouldn't be surprised if everyone else doesn't spend
>>>a lot of time on ponder=off games either.  It is simply 'unnatural' to run a
>>>program that way... and most of us would rather spend time tuning the program
>>>in the state it will play games, not in some crippled state that a user might
>>>use to play games.  IE do we also tune for (a) tiny transposition tables;  (b)
>>>no opening book;  (c) no databases (endgame); (d) modified user parameter
>>>settings; (e) any other random thing a user might try???
>>>
>>>IE I do my testing in the configuration that plays the best/strongest.  Not in
>>>configurations that someone might use "just because it is there..."
>>
>>I've been following the discussion with great interest and I have a couple of
>>questions, mostly due to ignorance.
>>
>>If you play an engine-engine match on one computer with permanent brain on and a
>>match with permanent brain off. What match would most likely be the best
>>estimate of the difference in strength? What are the complications with
>>permanent brain? Some suggest that it's the same for both, but there might be a
>>difference prioritywise concerning processortime, or?
>>
>>Best wishes...
>>Mogens
>
>
>Neither, unfortunately.  Here's why.
>
>Assume one null-move program and one non-null-move program.  If you use ponder
>mode, both will get 1/2 the machine basically.  Which means that in essence,
>the programs will be running on machines 1/2 the speed of the computer you are
>using.  That hurts a null-mover more, because reduced depth allows some critical
>null-move failures that deeper depths 'fix'.  So there, you get skewed results.

I do not think that there is a rule that null movers earn more from time
relative to non null movers and it may be depend in the program.
I have no proof that Junior earn less from time relative to Null movers.

Uri



This page took 0 seconds to execute

Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700

Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.